There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
1. In the good old days owners paid a fee to enter their horse in a race and an additional fee(s) if it was declared to run. Does this still apply now in run of the mill races and if so what are the fees?
2. Who decides if a race gets divided? The BHA or the Racecourse? Are there rules that govern this, and if so what are they?
Thank you
2. Who decides if a race gets divided? The BHA or the Racecourse? Are there rules that govern this, and if so what are they?
Thank you
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 31
|
By:
https://www.roa.co.uk/static/uploaded/e26794b9-74cd-4ae1-a9a1def509d1ad0e.pdf
That tells you the first part. |
|
By:
Where the number of races which might divide means that the overall limit on the number of races might be exceeded, an order of preference for division is determined by the British Horseracing Authority. The order in which races will be permitted to divide will be shown against the affected races.
|
|
By:
There's no additional fee to pay when you declare the horse to run.
|
|
By:
Seems to be 11/12 runners triggers a divide,which benefits the track,has they get extra media rights for the extra race.
So when they announce 25,000 races next year a reduction of 2 races,this then probably increases by another 1000 because of divided races.its a total shotshow,but on they plough. Then you get horses entered to make this happen ,but then become non runners. |
|
By:
Race divisions are governed by the safety limit on the number of runners at a course.
For example, only a maximum of 14 runners can contest races on the round course at Southwell's AW venue. Hence, if the final decs for any race over 6f or more there contains 15 or more runners, then the race divides. (It might also be 14 on the straight course at Southwell, as well.) All tracks have safety limits but some are so wide the safety number is never breached. Aside from safety, the benefit of race divisions come in maiden races, especially with younger horses. A two year maiden of 20 runners would mean it might well take ages to load the stalls. Thus, the horses that went in first would be at a major disadvantage. BTW, in my view tracks do not deliberately try to divide races. The BHA amay be poor at some things but they would soon identify sharp practise like that - although one or two races may have sneaked through in the past as a sighter to see if such a scheme would work! No, race disivions are dictated by safety numbers at the various tracks. |
|
By:
Good info The Knight. Thank you.
|
|
By:
hows Vienna these days?
|
|
By:
Morning guys
Thank you for all the sensible replies - much appreciated Going to 12.30 KO later -wind and rain will probably spoil the game though FWIW I expect Ponty will be very soft on Monday |
|
By:
will Miss Jones be attending?
|
|
By:
Rico and Miss Jones would look good together tbh.
|
|
By:
I have to admit, i really fancied Miss Jones, as a kid,
beautiful, classy, neurotic, feminine, intellectual woman?? The mind Is an erogenous zone ?? |
|
By:
Rigsby...I will be at Ponty Monday. Going will not be that bad. The water table will still be a fair way beneath the surface due to the recent extended dry periods. Hence, the rain will soon soak through the ground. But, with these high winds, the surface will soon dry anyway.
I would guess at Soft, Good to Soft in places for Monday. Only a deluge on Sunday might change that - and that is not forecast at present. |
|
By:
Don't forget to feed Vienna.
|
|
By:
The knight,thank you for explaining that they split races for safety reason,the bookies will be delighted,they now won’t have to give the tracks extra media rights money for the extra race,
|
|
By:
One genuine answer it’s as straight as a hairpin tbh….
|
|
By:
I don’t think it’s bad or wrong,or dodgy etc.its just prudent business sense,everyone wins,bar the extra media payment for the extra race,but they are getting a race for this payment,so theirs no downside or losers,it’s harmless really,but it’s engineered.
|
|
By:
this means nothing to me..
|
|
By:
It is not engineered. How many of those saying that actually understand the payment process for media rights? None would be my bet!
If it were engineered, why did not Newmarket split the 26 runner, 2nd race today then? Why does Donny not split the Lincoln, Ascot the Hunt Cup, Goodwood the Stewards Cup? I could go on and on. Although it is a waste of time trying to explain how things actually work to the bigots on here, let me try. Media rights are broadly based on a fee for a meeting plus an amount per runner, per race. So, a race with 20 runners earns the hosting track 20 lots of money - 20 runners, 20 fees. Now, if the track split the race into two lots of 10, they still get 20 payments but earned over 2 races instead of 1. So, there is no point in splitting races for extra money because it does not work like that. Anyway, does anyone think the bookies would allow themselves to be turned over in the way so many on here seem to think happens? I think not. For the last time, races are spilt for safety reasons. Tracks will put on longer cards (7, 8 or 9 races) to try to attract more runners and thus more fees. But the BHA will not allow a race to be split more than so many times - I think is tw0, and that is where the balloting procedure comes in. Hope that clears it up, although I suspect I have just wasted five minutes of my life trying to explain something to people who neither want to hear nor to understand because it derails their conspiracy angles!! And, to end, a word of advice to those who want to see conspiracy in every bit of racing. Instead, try to learn how things work and you might just find your punting improves as a result. |
|
By:
ok tar
|
|
By:
Thank you again. Great stuff that we would most not have been informed of by Ed and his groupies.
|
|
By:
https://www.racingpost.com/news/britain/arc-robustly-denies-accusations-of-declaring-horses-owned-by-subsidiary-company-in-order-to-divide-races-aWNOH0D0BgFQ/
One paragraph from that link... "Each divided race brings in additional revenue to the host racecourse via media rights payments from bookmakers, alongside funding for prize-money and regulatory services. Once a race has been divided it remains so even if there are non-runners" |
|
By:
That paragraph is from an uncredited story in the RP. Whoever wrote it did not fully understand how the media rights payments work. Now, I will concede that Arena have a different deal over those payments than Jockey Club Racecourses and independent tracks do. But, the basis as I have described it is how it works.
Whoever wrote that story in the RP was trying to find a controversial angle and did not bother to find out how the process really works. Sadly, that is very much like much of the modern media. Lastly, and I really am not going to post anymore on this, as I want to better spend my time preparing for next week's racing, do you really think that when contracts were drawn up for these payments, those paying the media rights money would have left a hole in the legalities that could cost them large lumps of extra cash? But, think how you wish ged. All I would advise you is that the more conspiracy theories I see punters put up about racing, the further away from making money at the game those punters become. Best of luck. |
|
By:
There are some inaccuracies in the posts above, for example exceeding the safety factor does not necessarily trigger a division.
The actual rules surrounding divisions of races is here: https://rules.britishhorseracing.com/#!/book/34/chapter/s3328-race-administration-code/content?section=s3330-division-of-races |
|
By:
Thank you @HappyJack
|
|
By:
hows Alan?
|
|
By:
The knight - the story in the RP was not trying to find a controversial angle. Ralph Beckett on the Nick Luck program pointed out that Scott Dixon (who trains a bunch of horses for Arc to 'support' races at their tracks) had repeatedly entered a particular horse (named in the article), causing races to be divided, subsequently withdrawing the horse, inferring that it was a deliberate tactic to increase media rights payments. Arc responded with a 'robust' denial. Hence the article in the RP. What else would you expect them to say?
|
|
By:
...and the RP article was written by Peter Scargill, the RP's deputy Industry Editor.
|
|
By:
this means nothing to me..
|
|
By:
The knight.
Sorry mate ,just cos you scream,I know how it works,you are all idiots,isn’t good enough,given what you say is full,of holes. You say,jockey club don’t divide,then say. You don’t know about other tracks,so guessing . Then you say,split the Lincoln or the auction race yesterday. The Lincoln is a main race,they can’t have double the big prize money for 2 divisions,plus why spoil the headline race of the day, The auction race is for horses qualified again big prize money,so they can’t find double the big prize money. On low value races,4k. Then splitting them covers the extra 4 k from the media rights. Again,I can’t see a problem,it’s irrelevant,but it happens. |
|
By:
Why would a track split a race if they got no extra money,they d just say race is full.
From the bookies side, Clearly 2 races of 10 runners will generate more bets than 1 race of 20 runners,extra 30 mins time span etc,so clearly more payments could be asked. You’re basically saying tracks must dread 20 entries,cos it forces them to find a new lot of prize money, It dosent pass the smell test. |
|
By:
capital of Austria.
|